Video conferencing with Television

Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip (More info?)

Hi,
For my masters project I am supposed to implement a Video Conferencing
facility with H.323. I have decided to do it on a PC board using the
intel 810 STB reference architecture running on a linux kernel. Is
there an alternative and what could be the major issue when it comes
to implementing a video chat for a Television. Also is there a place
where I can get the source for H.264 codec. I am sorry for being
vague, but I wanted to keep the desc. short.
Also is there a support for any webcam with 4 CIF resolution (708 X
570) in Linux.
Thanks and regards,
Ravi.
4 answers Last reply
More about video conferencing television
  1. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.voice-over-ip,comp.dcom.videoconf (More info?)

    FU's set to comp.dcom.videoconf

    "Ravi" <invertr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    news:4ed7b2ef.0406231038.7dc8bf52@posting.google.com...
    > Hi,
    > For my masters project I am supposed to implement a Video Conferencing
    > facility with H.323. I have decided to do it on a PC board using the
    > intel 810 STB reference architecture running on a linux kernel. Is
    > there an alternative and what could be the major issue when it comes
    > to implementing a video chat for a Television. Also is there a place
    > where I can get the source for H.264 codec.

    Source for a H.264 codec ? I doubt it, its too new and probably full of
    licensing implications. But you could take a look at openh323.org and
    packetizer.com to check.

    > I am sorry for being
    > vague, but I wanted to keep the desc. short.
    > Also is there a support for any webcam with 4 CIF resolution (708 X
    > 570) in Linux.

    I don't know but i would guess the answer is no. I have not seen any free
    webcam s/w that can do that high a resolution, i believe the higher ones do
    FCIF.

    > Thanks and regards,
    > Ravi.

    -=-peas-=-
  2. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.videoconf (More info?)

    Ravi,

    > "Ravi" <invertr@yahoo.com> wrote in message
    > news:4ed7b2ef.0406231038.7dc8bf52@posting.google.com...
    > > Hi,
    > > For my masters project I am supposed to implement a Video Conferencing
    > > facility with H.323. I have decided to do it on a PC board using the
    > > intel 810 STB reference architecture running on a linux kernel. Is
    > > there an alternative and what could be the major issue when it comes
    > > to implementing a video chat for a Television. Also is there a place
    > > where I can get the source for H.264 codec.
    >
    > Source for a H.264 codec ? I doubt it, its too new and probably full of
    > licensing implications. But you could take a look at openh323.org and
    > packetizer.com to check.

    I'm not sure where you can get implementations (yet), but I know they exist.
    The licensing terms have also been squared away:
    http://www.dailypayload.com/cgi-bin/news?l=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5tcGVnbGEuY29tL25ld3Mvbl8wNC0wNS0xOF9hdmMucGRm

    Paul
  3. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.videoconf (More info?)

    "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote in message
    news:akjVc.179436$wH4.11845288@twister.southeast.rr.com...

    > > Source for a H.264 codec ? I doubt it, its too new and probably full of
    > > licensing implications. But you could take a look at openh323.org and
    > > packetizer.com to check.
    >
    > I'm not sure where you can get implementations (yet), but I know they
    exist.
    > The licensing terms have also been squared away:
    >
    http://www.dailypayload.com/cgi-bin/news?l=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5tcGVnbGEuY29tL25ld3Mvbl8wNC0wNS0xOF9hdmMucGRm

    Maybe i mis-read the press release but i dn't see how Video Conferencing has
    been excepted from the Royalty fees. As far as i can see all it is talking
    about is broadcasting (streaming) not two/n-way video conferencing. The
    reason i make this clarification is that the poster was asking about Webcam
    s/w which is typically free and therefore can afford royalties.

    I'd personally be v.disappointed if MPEG had allowed a protocol with their
    name on it to go out the door with such restrictions in place.

    > Paul

    -=-peas-=-
  4. Archived from groups: comp.dcom.videoconf (More info?)

    Peas,

    That was just a pointer to the press release. Here are the licensing terms:
    http://www.mpegla.com/avc/AVC_TermsSummary.pdf

    You can see that videoconferencing is covered. The H.264 licensing site is:
    http://www.mpegla.com/avc/index.cfm

    Paul


    "-=-peas-=-" <reply-to-newsgroup@invalid.invalid> wrote in message
    news:cg588a$hs0$1$8302bc10@news.demon.co.uk...
    >
    > "Paul E. Jones" <paulej@packetizer.com> wrote in message
    > news:akjVc.179436$wH4.11845288@twister.southeast.rr.com...
    >
    > > > Source for a H.264 codec ? I doubt it, its too new and probably full
    of
    > > > licensing implications. But you could take a look at openh323.org and
    > > > packetizer.com to check.
    > >
    > > I'm not sure where you can get implementations (yet), but I know they
    > exist.
    > > The licensing terms have also been squared away:
    > >
    >
    http://www.dailypayload.com/cgi-bin/news?l=aHR0cDovL3d3dy5tcGVnbGEuY29tL25ld3Mvbl8wNC0wNS0xOF9hdmMucGRm
    >
    > Maybe i mis-read the press release but i dn't see how Video Conferencing
    has
    > been excepted from the Royalty fees. As far as i can see all it is talking
    > about is broadcasting (streaming) not two/n-way video conferencing. The
    > reason i make this clarification is that the poster was asking about
    Webcam
    > s/w which is typically free and therefore can afford royalties.
    >
    > I'd personally be v.disappointed if MPEG had allowed a protocol with their
    > name on it to go out the door with such restrictions in place.
    >
    > > Paul
    >
    > -=-peas-=-
    >
    >
Ask a new question

Read More

VPN Video Conferencing Networking